Phase 1.5
| Meeting Date | Recording | Recap |
|---|---|---|
| April 8th, 2024 | Zoom Cloud Recording | The research team met to develop our research plan for Phase 1.5. We began our meeting by discussing articles we read outside of our session about developing research plans. We then spent some time identifying our most important focus areas for crafting our problem statement. Finally, we clumped focus areas by topic to give us direction as we craft our problem statement, objectives and ultimately our whole research plan. Key takeaways: |
| Good research plans always start with a problem statement that is measurable and specific | ||
| Identifying the specifics of Who/what/where/when/why are important for stakeholder/team alignment | ||
| Our main focus areas for our problem statement are: Messaging, engagement, usability | ||
| The team is drafting problem statements on their own time and we will create a final problem statement at the beginning of our next session. We will then start drafting the format for our usability test so we can recruit participants and subsequently have data to share with other teams in the following weeks. | ||
| April 15th, 2024 | Zoom Cloud Recording | High level takeaways from our meeting: |
| We thought a content audit was a task better suited for UXW (sounds like they've since agreed to take on this task) | ||
| UXR will be ready to conduct usability testing on wireframes in two weeks | ||
| We had a short working session to refine our Problem Statement: User’s visiting the GJEP website face challenges in effectively receiving and engaging with content due to clarity, accessibility and impact of the current messaging/graphics. This is causing users to feel confused and cognitively overloaded. Furthermore, the organization lacks understanding about how their users prefer to consume information. There is a need to explore whether GJEP’s messaging resonates with users and whether the language and visual elements used are comprehensible, digestible and effective. Finally, it is imperative that we test for user trust/organizational credibility to ensure that users are not only engaged but also feel a high level of confidence and comfort in supporting GJEP. | ||
| We ended the meeting talking about actionable objectives for our research. What do we want to learn? We stressed the need to make these objectives quantifiable. Some ideas included: | ||
| Measuring trust and credibility | ||
| Frustration scores to measure navigation success rates | ||
| Critical task success rate | ||
| Net Promoter Score (NPS) | ||
| For our next meeting we will be writing our research questions, developing a consent form for research and strategizing how to recruit participants. | ||
| April 22nd, 2024 | Zoom Cloud Recording | We refined our objectives for our usability test and determined the following: |
| We will test critical tasks and user flows to ensure user navigation is straight forward and recognizable. This will include things like Subscribe, Donate, Find an Article, etc... | ||
| We will test user expectations for GJEP as a whole and for some pages that we feel are currently confusing or unclear | ||
| We will test content- What features are memorable? Are users able to find specific features? How do users perceive GJEP after spending time with the wireframe? | ||
| Our research will aim for mixed methods results: we will look for quantifiable results where we can and use qualitative follow-up to provide clarity to our data. | ||
| It was decided that we will test some content in this round of testing. Therefore, we are asking the UXD team to update the prototype to include content that is currently on the website. | ||
| @Rachel B MTL | ||
| thought this was feasible for the design team to complete. Tagging | ||
| @Oleksandra Shumakova | ||
| & | ||
| @Kristin Lucas | ||
| for communication purposes. | ||
| It was mentioned that the prototype was not very complex and therefore there wasn't a lot of navigation to test. I have since found more links embedded throughout the prototype that will give us sufficient testing material. However, I think a future goal for UXD could be to further build out the complexity of the prototype. | ||
| We still want to test for trust and credibility but think that might be a better metric to test for on a higher fidelity prototype | ||
| @Janike Ruginis Gross | ||
| Suggested focusing on clarity for this round of testing. | ||
| The UXR team are working asynchronously to write research questions and will finalize the usability test script during our next meeting. | ||
| At this time we do not need anything from UXW, PM or PS. However, we may ask PM for assistance with participant recruitment in the near future! | ||
| April 29th, 2024 | Zoom Cloud Recording | The design team updated the wireframes from Phase 1. |
| I highly suggest reviewing the UXD Figma page (the up-to-date version of the wireframes is under the page “:large_red_square: Prototype V2”) to familiarize yourself with the direction the UX design team is taking. Note that slight changes may occur based on UXW feedback and content implementation. |
Meeting Agenda (4/29): Restructure and edit the existing research plan and research questions to align with the new wireframes. Revise and narrow down the design team’s user flows to 4-5 tasks, prioritizing and regrouping as necessary. Consider creating sub-tasks within main scenarios. Create a usability test script. Organize the flow of tasks to ensure coherence. Determine the research timeline for testing and data analysis. | | May 6th, 2024 | Zoom Cloud Recording | | | | | | | May 22nd | | For an update, we have our first demo meeting on Thursday. In this meeting, we will be giving an overview of what we did in Phase 1.5. In this presentation, I want to make a 40/60 divide, allocating more time to presenting our UT report/results than the methodology behind it.
For tomorrow’s meeting, I’d like to discuss the insights and recommendations we have for our stakeholders.
I plan to cover the following topics in our meeting: Overall Prototype and Page-Specific Findings and Recommendations Quantitative and Qualitative metrics Common themes and patterns (Quotes from participants) ****What didn’t work What worked well What needs improvement Key takeaways and recommendations Stakeholders UX Design UX Writing GJEP Team Internal Limitations and Future Improvements UX Research Team Prototype UT script Limitations Next Steps What are our next step(s)? |